The California Lemon Law is built on five statutory and doctrinal pillars: the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act (Civil Code §§ 1790–1795.8), the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 2301–2312), the Tanner Consumer Protection Act lemon presumption (Civil Code § 1793.22), the four-year statute of limitations (Commercial Code § 2725) and its tolling doctrines, and the distinction between express and implied warranties (Civil Code § 1791.1). Together they govern who qualifies, what defects matter, how many repair attempts are “reasonable,” when the clock starts, and what disclaimers a manufacturer can or cannot impose.
Why the Statutory Framework Matters
California Lemon Law cases are won and lost on statutory interpretation. Knowing which provision applies to your facts determines:
- Whether your vehicle qualifies at all
- Whether you can use the lemon presumption as a shortcut or must prove “reasonable number of attempts” the long way
- Whether you have one year, four years, or more to file
- Whether dealer “as-is” disclaimers cut off your claim
- Whether you should file in state or federal court
Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act
The state statute commonly known as the California Lemon Law. Enacted in 1970, codified at Civil Code §§ 1790–1795.8. Imposes manufacturer obligations to repair, repurchase, or replace; provides civil penalties up to 2× damages for willful violations (§ 1794(c)); shifts attorney’s fees onto the manufacturer (§ 1794(d)). The strongest state consumer-warranty statute in the U.S.
Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
The federal counterpart, 15 U.S.C. §§ 2301–2312. Provides a federal cause of action for breach of written and implied warranties, with its own fee-shifting under § 2310(d)(2). Almost always pleaded alongside Song-Beverly in California cases for jurisdictional backup and as an implied-warranty backstop.
The Lemon Law Presumption (Tanner Act)
Civil Code § 1793.22 creates a rebuttable presumption that the manufacturer has had a “reasonable number of attempts” when, within 18 months or 18,000 miles, the consumer has experienced four or more attempts for the same defect, two or more for a serious safety defect, or 30 or more cumulative days out of service. The presumption is one path; the underlying statute applies outside the window too.
Statute of Limitations
Four years from breach under Commercial Code § 2725, tolled by the repair doctrine, the discovery rule, and equitable tolling. Many claims that look time-barred at first glance are actually timely once the tolling rules are applied.
Implied vs. Express Warranties
Express warranties are the manufacturer’s written promises; implied warranties of merchantability and fitness arise by operation of law under Civil Code § 1791.1. California lemon law cases plead both. Implied warranties on new consumer goods cannot be disclaimed (§ 1792).
Free California Lemon Law Case Review
Not sure which statutes apply to your facts? McMillan Law Group will evaluate at no cost. No fee unless we win.